Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Saudi Sharia court sentences gang rape victim to 200 lashes

“According to Sharia Law, a Saudi Arabian woman must be accompanied by a male guardian at all times in public, something the 19 year old victim did not obey when she went to meet a friend, according to website Live Buddhism.” Not just a “Saudi Arabian woman,” but any woman. Since the victim did not do this, she is at fault. This is Islamic law. It is barbaric and inhumane, but it is Islamic law.

The victim of a violent gang rape has been sentenced by a Saudi Arabian court to 200 lashes and six months in jail for the crimes of speaking to the press and indecency.

According to Sharia Law, a Saudi Arabian woman must be accompanied by a male guardian at all times in public, something the 19 year old victim did not obey when she went to meet a friend, according to website Live Buddhism.

While in a car with a student friend, retrieving a picture, two men got into the vehicle and drove them to a secluded area. She said she was raped there by seven men, three of whom also attacked her friend.

The Shi’ite Muslim woman had initially been sentenced to 90 lashes after being convicted of violating the Kingdom’s religious diktats on segregation of the sexes, where woman are treated as second class citizens.

After the sentences were handed down following the rape in 2006, which included lenient custodial sentences for the men guilty of the violent crime, the woman’s lawyer appealed to the Saudi General Court. But instead of choosing to overturn the punishments for being the victim of a crime, the court more than doubled her sentence. At the same time, they also roughly doubled the prison sentences for the seven men convicted of raping her, according to Saudi news outlets.

Abdul Rahman al-Lahem, who defended the woman, reached out to the media after the sentences were handed down. The court has since banned him from further defending the woman, confiscating his license and summoning him to a disciplinary hearing later this month.

Saudi Arabia defended the controversial decision to punish the victim, saying that she was at fault for being out without a male friend, something which was met with international outcry.

“The Ministry of Justice welcomes constructive criticism, away from emotions,” it said in a statement.

The statement also said that the “charges were proven” against the woman for having been in a car with a strange male, and repeated criticism of her lawyer for talking “defiantly” about the judicial system, saying “it has shown ignorance.” They also added that the sentence was increased because the victim had spoken to the media. “For whoever has an objection on verdicts issued, the system allows to appeal without resorting to the media,” a statement on the official Saudi Press Agency said.

Politicians from the West reacted angrily to the news, with Jose Verger, the Canadian minister responsible for women, calling it “barbaric” and saying the country would complain to Saudi authorities.

U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said, “I think when you look at the crime and the fact that now the victim is punished, I think that causes a fair degree of surprise and astonishment. It is within the power of the Saudi government to take a look at the verdict and change it.”

UK political activist Angharad Yeo, who is half Saudi and has campaigned against violation of women’s rights at home and abroad. said it “sends a clear message that women are not valued and only seen as a possession.”

The UKIP member described the ruling as “disgusting”, adding that a woman was being punished “because men in Islam are weak and pathetic and hide behind Islam. What message does that send to young women?” she asked.

“You can’t ever protect yourself and your well being is a lottery. Should you be unfortunate enough to be assaulted, expect for it to be your own fault.”

The New York based Human Rights Watch said the verdict “not only sends victims of sexual violence the message that they should not press charges, but in effect offers protection and impunity to the perpetrators.”

SAW, when used in reference to the putrescent mo, is an acronym for ” salle alaa hu alaihi wa sallim” . it means the same as ”peace be upon him”, (PBUH) the only difference is that it’s in Arabic, and when translated into English it means ”peace be upon him”.

One can substitute ” piss be upon him”, or any other deserve insult one likes ! 🙂

Jay boo… You son of a bitch i think Mr.Pope Francis just came to your home and slept with your mother go check ur mother and ask her ur not born for single father. Your mom will be a bitch she could have slept with enemies of muslims and then you came out. As a result you are now putting all your frestation in here. Respect the laws were n which country you stay. You no need to insult or degrade religion.

So under sharia, seeing an unaccompanied woman is basically an opportunity to rape her….probably to teach her modesty. Their laws are written for the advancement of evil people. Islams only purpose is the advancement of thugs.

If the non-Muslim woman went out in public with a non-Muslim male escort, would she still be safe? Would the non-Muslim male escort be legally able to defend him and her from Muslim males? If he fought back would he be punished?

If a woman is not related to her male companion, i.e. he is not her husband, father, brother or uncle but a “friend”, she is fair game and can and should be raped. It is common law and understanding; sharia gives protection to rapists due to “mitigating” circumstances, such as the woman looked provocative, did not display modesty or she was pretty. These factors will exonerate the rapist and doom the victim. The only time a rapist will be punished is when he perpetrates the crime even though the woman had a family male escort and took all precautions to cover up and appear modest.
In most cases, however, a rape victim has Zero chance of winning a case. At best she can expect to be shunned by public and family. In most cases her punishment is stoning.
Yea, sharia is so enlightened and progressive.

Point well made. And what does this say about men?!? Men are portrayed as incapable of controlling their sexual urges – isn’t that pretty insulting to thoughtful men?? – so, uuhhh, therefore, it’s the woman’s fault for provoking him…Come on. Not elevating the male ‘superior’ status much. Won’t go on, old argument. Pathetic

Talk about blame the victim! What is wrong with those people, a woman can’t even go out completely covered without being gang raped! It explains somewhat the kidnapping and rape of non-Muslim females. Women’s Lib will come to the rescue.

Don’t despair
I saw a commentary about Islam on a mainstream talk show earlier today as I was switching through the channels and all of the commentators where skillfully navigating around the usual victimhood booby-traps that Muslims salivate over while knowledgeably slam dunking Islam’s ideological connection to ISIS and stuff like this. It was Bam – Bam- Bam devastatingly good.

Every time someone says is is not islam, this should be brought up as an example of what islam is and make the someone eat their lying words.
The beast of satan has strongholds in many parts of the earth and in each part, his worshippers show just how blood thirsty satan is, how cruel and demonic the beast created by the devil.

The True God appeals to a person’s better part, the part that is kind and loving, that exercises justice.
The devil satan, false god of this world, ancient baal, molech, islam, appeals to baser, cruel hearts devoid of mercy, justice, love and kindness. What a contrast!

Shouldn’t laugh but this has made me giggle. The raghead women in the UK will all say, this isn’t islam this is Saudi law therefore islam is again innocent of being an atrocious ideological cult of death.

What I want to know is who were her witnesses? Thought she had to provide four witnesses to a rape?

You know, in Islamic Shariah Law, a woman needs 4 male witnesses to prove rape (YES, they expect 4 men to just be standing around and watch a man rape a woman), otherwise it is called adultery (and the sentence is often stoning). If those 7 men were convicted of participating in the rapes of the 2 women, then they should, under Shariah Law, be considered the 4+ male witnesses that PROVE that she (both women) was a victim of rape, since the men were also convicted of the rapes.
P. S., Did you know, that a female who has relations with a man, who is not her husband, either consensual OR rape, is considered to have committed adultery. She DOESN’T even have to be married, and even HAVE a husband yet, it means to her FUTURE husband, if she is single. Black & White – if the man ISN’T married to her – it’s considered adultery, unless rape (with 4 male witnesses) is proven.

Dear Dr. 80 :
You are an expert on sharia law, having gained
fame five years ago for your thesis that the U.S.
Constitution is already 80 percent sharia-compliant.
Please allow me to consult you about a point
of sharia law.

In order for a whip-lash to count as a proper lash,
doesn’t the whippee have to be bare-backed?
And a punitive whipping by nature is a public event.
So this requires the female offender to be naked,
at least from the waist up, when she attends her own
flogging. Isn’t such indecency prohibited by sharia?

The photo accompanying this article shows a
clothed woman being whipped. This is sexually
discriminatory, because male offenders are not
allowed to cover their back with any such protective
clothing.
This feminist mollycoddling has no place in Islam.

Moreover, that photo shows that the whipper and the
whippee are both women, and that both are wearing a
burqa. What are the rules governing this?
May not a male whip a female? (Actually, that photo
might be a fake: just look at the roman lettering on the
yellow banner in the background. Is this really a
scene from Saudi Arabia, or from Malaysia or
Indonesia?)

In addition, consider the doctrine of “mahram”.
As explained in http://islamqa.info/en/5538 ,
a woman’s mahram is any male to whom she is related
by blood, marriage, or breastfeeding (e.g., a co-worker
to whom she has given suck so that they may work
late together in the same office).

As you know, a woman in public must be accompanied
by one of her mahrams. But a flogging is a public event.
So a woman’s mahram must also be present at her
flogging (as well as the mahram of the Muslimah flogger).

Hence, the paradox: What if all of the offender’s mahrams
boycott her flogging? What happens then? The flogging
cannot legally take place. Right?

And here is an even more extreme case, based on the
old Zionist joke about a man who kills his father and mother
and then demands mercy because he is an orphan.
What if a Muslimah murders all her mahrams?
Then her execution cannot take place, because
a beheading is a public event at which she must
be accompanied by one of her mahrams.

Sharia legal scholars must have a solution to this
dilemma. What is it?

This is good to know I see so many Muslim women walking around here with out a male guardians all the time in public! Now all I see (after reading this) is free sex! and if anyone tries to stop me I’ll just claim Sharia Law and ask if they want to tag in! It’s about time someone starting using their laws against them like they do to us!?!

No woman should be treated as a possession. In my experience ladies have made a huge contribution to my live and society. I can only pity those backward primitives who truly believe otherwise. Women are equal. We are one.

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer. in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.